America decides to invade Afghanistan because a group which they help create and fund in the late 70's against the Russians has it's base there and is suspected to have been behind a terror attacks in New York that was most likely an inside job by the Pentagon and defense industries.

It's complicated but daft at the same time.

America then engages a rag-tag militia for close to 11years. A militia that has no air force, navey, marines, army, navy seals, tactical weapons, money, CIA, Beyounce posters to w@nk to OR EVEN INTERNET ACCESS.

America eventual decides to leave.

Americans back home are beginning to think war really sucks

America does successfully invade Sadam using the same tactics they used 10years back (sadam was one dumb goat farker)

But abruptly leaves not before killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians and starting a counter-insurgency that became a secular war leaving Iraqis wondering if Bush was actually saying v1brators instead of liberators.

Obama then opts for the safer game boy option of drones since Americans can't fight sh1t

definitely not the end so far for american f00lery but for now I can stop posting

Magic Bishop: America eventually defeats the the batsh1t insane Japs by committing the greatest mass murder ever after all efforts in conventional warring fail to defeat the Crazy Japs.

Over 300,000 Civilians are killed.

fake u're jux anti-America

Psylas: fake

BANNED PAYLESS IT IS OBVIOUS YOUR TRIBAL SLURRING IS DEFINITELY INAPPROPRIATE FOR THIS THREAD.

GO SOME WERE ELSE WITH UR NONSENSE

Magic Bishop:

BANNED PAYLESS IT IS OBVIOUS YOUR TRIBAL SLURRING IS DEFINITELY INAPPROPRIATE FOR THIS THREAD.

GO SOME WERE ELSE WITH UR NONSENSE

u're bringinq false information and u want everyone to believe u, u better delete it

Humour and human tragedy. It is saddening how some humans just initiate and execute needless wars. But I no blame them sha, since d initiators are not always d ones that carry guns.

Brief and covered several eras, but must admit the history is biased against America

Did learn a thing or two. But i think this is a one sided view. A balanced approach will be most advantageous.

Magic Bishop: America then decided to enter the European campaign at the very last minute when all the warring factions are exhausted.

America shamelessly claims credit for this victory

I understand you may have issues with the US but there is no need to revise history. It is an undeniable fact that had the US not been provoked to join the war and Hitler delayed invading Russia until after the fall of Britain, all of Europe would have been under Germany.

All the major battles in Europe involved US troops and there is no way, Britain could have achieved any significant victories with them. See below for a list of US generals who were involved in the liberation of Europe

Invasion of Sicily under Eisenhower – Patton, Bradley, Keyes, Hewitt, Spaatz
Invasion of Italy – Clark, Dawley, Lucas, Truscott
Battle of the Bulge – McAuliffe, Bradley, Hodges, Patton, Eisenhower
North Africa – Patton, Spaatz, Doolittle, Eisenhower, Fredendall, Ward
Normandy – Eisenhower
France – Devers, Patch, Truscott, Hewitt, Milburn
Advance on Germany on the Western Front – Eisenhower, Devers, Bradley, Patton, Hobbs, Hodges, Huebner, Hood
Germany – Bradley, Collins, Hodges, Gerow, Devers
Belgium & Netherlands – Brereton, Taylor, Doolittle, Vanderberg

The US lost approximately 300,000 men almost a million were wounded. Approximately 15 million Americans were involved in that war. America claimed victory because, there would have been no victory without them. The opening of the Western Front is what resulted in Germany re-distributing troops from the Russian campaign.

Katsumoto:

I understand you may have issues with the US but there is no need to revise history. It is an undeniable fact that had the US not been provoked to join the war and Hitler delayed invading Russia until after the fall of Britain, all of Europe would have been under Germany.

All the major battles in Europe involved US troops and there is no way, Britain could have achieved any significant victories with them. See below for a list of US generals who were involved in the liberation of Europe

Invasion of Sicily under Eisenhower – Patton, Bradley, Keyes, Hewitt, Spaatz
Invasion of Italy – Clark, Dawley, Lucas, Truscott
Battle of the Bulge – McAuliffe, Bradley, Hodges, Patton, Eisenhower
North Africa – Patton, Spaatz, Doolittle, Eisenhower, Fredendall, Ward
Normandy – Eisenhower
France – Devers, Patch, Truscott, Hewitt, Milburn
Advance on Germany on the Western Front – Eisenhower, Devers, Bradley, Patton, Hobbs, Hodges, Huebner, Hood
Germany – Bradley, Collins, Hodges, Gerow, Devers
Belgium & Netherlands – Brereton, Taylor, Doolittle, Vanderberg

The US lost approximately 300,000 men almost a million were wounded. Approximately 15 million Americans were involved in that war. America claimed victory because, there would have been no victory without them. The opening of the Western Front is what resulted in Germany re-distributing troops from the Russian campaign.

I agree with most of what you said but i disagree with the bolded. Yes Germany might have won if the allies didnt get America's help but it has to to with supplies and not manpower. Russians pushed the Germans back without american troops. we all know how the pacific theater which involved primary the US and Japan ended. an A bomb at to me used to win. And u should remember that the liberation of Europe had to do with troops from many countries in Fact the Americans had it easier during the Normandy landings than the rest of the allies forces. US troops werent that convincing when they fought alone. and like i said, the pacific theater was a perfect example.

Great piece..u forgot to mention hw dey were disgraced abt d syrian issue after moving hell and earth to stria with their shit load of guns. Me think americas military might is grossly exaggerated..the greatest might is the power of english language and media hype

..yep that pretty much sums up america for you..could not have said it better...except for some other small F9s you forgot to add to thier report

card... and I so love that Castro pic lol..if there is any country i want to visit in this world ..it is cuba..for so many reasons

@Katsumoto..while i agree that america made significant sacrifices...i strongly believe the second world war was won on the eastern front....

we would all be wearing swastika underpants if oga hitla had not broken the ribbentrop-Molotov non agression pact and gone past poland to

invade russia...this sentiment was shared by a handful of his more reasonable generals but no one dared confront oga at the top...

i agree more with @Aigipan on this one...

i'd be happy to debate this as it is an area i enjoyed studying so much...
perhaps opening a new thread?...or would it be appropriate here?..

Magic Bishop:
America then engages a rag-tag militia for close to 11years. A militia that has no air force, navey, marines, army, navy seals, tactical weapons, money, CIA, Beyounce posters to w@nk to OR EVEN INTERNET ACCESS.

Classic!

The funniest real ish i've read in a very long time.

Aigipan:


I agree with most of what you said but i disagree with the bolded. Yes Germany might have won if the allies didnt get America's help but it has to to with supplies and not manpower. Russians pushed the Germans back without american troops. we all know how the pacific theater which involved primary the US and Japan ended. an A bomb at to me used to win. And u should remember that the liberation of Europe had to do with troops from many countries in Fact the Americans had it easier during the Normandy landings than the rest of the allies forces. US troops werent that convincing when they fought alone. and like i said, the pacific theater was a perfect example.

When Germany declared war on the US, all of Europe except for Britain, Spain, and Portugal was under Germany.

1. The US contributed 16 million soldiers. All through the war, only 3.5 million brits served. Considering that Britain was the only enemy to Germany & Italy in Europe and North Africa, can you elaborate on how Britain could have won the war without US troops?

2. The Americans took three beaches (Omaha, Pointe du Huc, Utah), the Brits took two beaches (Sword & Gold) and the Canadians took Juno. The US suffered the most casualties during the Normandy landings. The Brits and Canadians lost almost 16,000 while the US lost almost 20,000.

3. Japanese troops were the most disciplined and easy to maintain during the war. They survived on the least rations and always fought to the death. The Japanese won all the battles in the pacific until the battle of midway in 1942. After the decisive victory for the US at Midway, the war turned in the favour of the US. This victory would serve the US well in the Guadalcanal campaign. Most of the victories went to the US. Truman took the decision to use the A-bomb to quicken Japanese surrender and prevent huge losses that would have been required to take Japan. The war had ended in Europe and an invasion of Japan would have been costly in terms of lives and money. The A bomb achieved both objectives.

4. Fighting on two fronts, declaring war is what ultimately cost the war for Germany. Without an Eastern Front, the US would have needed more troops in Europe. And without US/Canada financial support and fighting on the Western Front, the Russians would not have been able to fight back. Of the approximated 30 million who lost their lives on the Eastern Front, approximately 25- 27 million were Russians.

Summary – without US military and financial support, Europe (including Russia) had no chance against Germany.

khamas19: ..yep that pretty much sums up america for you..could not have said it better...except for some other small F9s you forgot to add to thier report

card... and I so love that Castro pic lol..if there is any country i want to visit in this world ..it is cuba..for so many reasons

@Katsumoto..while i agree that america made significant sacrifices...i strongly believe the second world war was won on the eastern front....

we would all be wearing swastika underpants if oga hitla had not broken the ribbentrop-Molotov non agression pact and gone past poland to

invade russia...this sentiment was shared by a handful of his more reasonable generals but no one dared confront oga at the top...

i agree more with @Aigipan on this one...

i'd be happy to debate this as it is an area i enjoyed studying so much...
perhaps opening a new thread?...or would it be appropriate here?..

I responded to you below (point 4).

Katsumoto:

When Germany declared war on the US, all of Europe except for Britain, Spain, and Portugal was under Germany.

1. The US contributed 16 million soldiers. All through the war, only 3.5 million brits served. Considering that Britain was the only enemy to Germany & Italy in Europe and North Africa, can you elaborate on how Britain could have won the war without US troops?

2. The Americans took three beaches (Omaha, Pointe du Huc, Utah), the Brits took two beaches (Sword & Gold) and the Canadians took Juno. The US suffered the most casualties during the Normandy landings. The Brits and Canadians lost almost 16,000 while the US lost almost 20,000.

3. Japanese troops were the most disciplined and easy to maintain during the war. They survived on the least rations and always fought to the death. The Japanese won all the battles in the pacific until the battle of midway in 1942. After the decisive victory for the US at Midway, the war turned in the favour of the US. This victory would serve the US well in the Guadalcanal campaign. Most of the victories went to the US. Truman took the decision to use the A-bomb to quicken Japanese surrender and prevent huge losses that would have been required to take Japan. The war had ended in Europe and an invasion of Japan would have been costly in terms of lives and money. The A bomb achieved both objectives.

4. Fighting on two fronts, declaring war is what ultimately cost the war for Germany. Without an Eastern Front, the US would have needed more troops in Europe. And without US/Canada financial support and fighting on the Western Front, the Russians would not have been able to fight back. Of the approximated 30 million who lost their lives on the Eastern Front, approximately 25- 27 million were Russians.

Summary – without US military and financial support, Europe (including Russia) had no chance against Germany.

You made a lot of Valid point but i believe US financial backbone played a more crucial role in the war. American troops werent has battle hardened as the Russians (probably due to Stalin's Iron fist) and their lend lease policy (which more than doubled the US manufacturing sector) helped the allies. Britian and Russia wey the important players in the Allied powers if u consider how many fronts The brits had to fight it. Burma, India, El Alamien, Greece, Singapore. massive empire means more commitment.


That being said, I didnt know much about Pointe du Huc landings. the 5 other beach heads were more popular i guess. I learnt something new
Thanks!

Magic Bishop: Obama then opts for the safer game boy option of drones since Americans can't fight sh1t

www.nairaland.com/attachments/1421754_obama_spoof_osama_mwn_jpg3ab7edb0d8882cdbb3150d39c928862a

You understand the American mindset really well.

Epic thread. Few words. Great points.

Psylas: fake u're jux anti-America

what s there to like about American Foreign policy?

I want to digress a bit. I think africa also deserve some credit for the victory gained in the WWII. Some 350,000 men and women from africa served in the allied forces. They took part in campaigns in the middle east, north africa, east africa, italy and the far east where the royal west african frontier force which consisted of men from Gambia, Nigeria, Gold coast and sierra leone fought gallantly against the japanese in burma.

lakhadimar: I want to digress a bit. I think africa also deserve some credit for the victory gained in the WWII. Some 350,000 men and women from africa served in the allied forces. They took part in campaigns in the middle east, north africa, east africa, italy and the far east where the royal west african frontier force which consisted of men from Gambia, Nigeria, Gold coast and sierra leone fought gallantly against the japanese in burma.

You are correct.

These African soldiers fought a war that wasn't theirs, in far away places they had never heard about, against an enemy that was arguably the most disciplined and determined in that era. Pertinent to also mention that they were also fighting for their lives against nature and wild animals. Salute to those men.

Katsumoto:

You are correct.

These African soldiers fought a war that wasn't theirs, in far away places they had never heard about, against an enemy that was arguably the most disciplined and determined in that era. Pertinent to also mention that they were also fighting for their lives against nature and wild animals. Salute to those men.

Thanks pa katz. I also read that Nigeria's brigadier babafemi ogundipe took part in the campaign againt the japanese at burma during the WWII, is that so?

Katsumoto:

You are correct.

These African soldiers fought a war that wasn't theirs, in far away places they had never heard about, against an enemy that was arguably the most disciplined and determined in that era. Pertinent to also mention that they were also fighting for their lives against nature and wild animals. Salute to those men.

Those men were cannon fodder and were only used in WW1 type of assaults i.e. in surges.

The real gallant African soldiers would be the Haitian Slaves who uprooted their French Slave masters and set up the first Independent Black Nation.

Then there are the so-called Buffalo Soldiers who fought by the Union Soldiers against the southern Confederate forces to stem out slavery. Now those are men who fought a just cause not these Burma soldiers who where drafted to fight an ethnic war between European Imperialists.

Magic Bishop:

Those men were cannon fodder and were only used in WW1 type of assaults i.e. in surges.

The real gallant African soldiers would be the Haitian Slaves who uprooted their French Slave masters and set up the first Independent Black Nation.

Then there are the so-called Buffalo Soldiers who fought by the Union Soldiers against the southern Confederate forces to stem out slavery. Now those are men who fought a just cause not these Burma soldiers who where drafted to fight an ethnic war between European Imperialists.

You don't need to ridicule the efforts of those men just so you can elevate others. There are different causes which requires men to fight; even if they were fighting to put food in the bellies of family members, their efforts were noble and gallant.

Second, you need to read up about how colonialism gave way to independence due to experiences in Burma. The invincibility of the 'white man' was gone and the African man saw that the white man was just as vulnerable as he was to death. After Burma, there remained no mysticism. It was no coincidence that many nations gained independence after WW2.

lakhadimar: Thanks pa katz. I also read that Nigeria's brigadier babafemi ogundipe took part in the campaign againt the japanese at burma during the WWII, is that so?

Ogundipe, I believe, was the only soldier who fought in Burma who would later become a commissioned officer in the Nigerian Army.

And I am no pa.

Katsumoto:


Second, y[b]ou need to read up about how colonialism gave way to independence due to experiences in Burma.[/b] The invincibility of the 'white man' was gone and the African man saw that the white man was just as vulnerable as he was to death. After Burma, there remained no mysticism. It was no coincidence that many nations gained independence after WW2.

NO NO NO.

Roosevelt made it clear to France and Britain that after WW2 they should relinquish their imperialistic grip on their colonies since Hitler was just doing what they (France and Britain) had being doing only in Europe.

If anything, the end of WW2 with the detonation of an atomic bomb should make the white man invisible.

Many people are not aware of the Haitian Revolution and how it led to the first Independent Black Nation to be formed in the western Hemisphere but what many of you might not know is that the then President of the U.S. sent a detachment of Marines to invade the newly independent nation (which was not a colony of America but France) all in a bid to stem the Nigga insurrection which they feared may trigger a slave revolt in the U.S.

Magic Bishop:

NO NO NO.

Roosevelt made it clear to France and Britain that after WW2 they should relinquish their imperialistic grip on their colonies since Hitler was just doing what they (France and Britain) had being doing only in Europe.

If anything, the end of WW2 with the detonation of an atomic bomb should make the white man invisible.

When did Roosevelt do this? Movements for independence had started in many colonies before WW2. At the end of WW2, many European countries were impoverished. Europe could not afford any conflicts. Britain, being wise, started the process of leaving colonies to self-rule. France which didn't immediately, suffered a series of defeats in Asia, most notably in Indochina. With many colonies now having significant numbers of battle-hardened men, Colonialists started to withdraw.

It had little to do with Roosevelt; Roosevelt certainly wasn't around at the end of WW2 and many colonialists held onto colonies well into the 70s.

How could the A Bomb which was denoted in Japan make the white man invisible? Was the A bomb not made by the white man? And were the first casualties of the A bomb Caucasian?

Katsumoto:

When did Roosevelt do this? Movements for independence had started in many colonies before WW2. At the end of WW2, many European countries were impoverished. Europe could not afford any conflicts. Britain, being wise, started the process of leaving colonies to self-rule. France which didn't immediately, suffered a series of defeats in Asia, most notably in Indochina. With many colonies now having significant numbers of battle-hardened men, Colonialists started to withdraw.

It had little to do with Roosevelt; Roosevelt certainly wasn't around at the end of WW2 and many colonialists held onto colonies well into the 70s.

How could the A Bomb which was denoted in Japan make the white man invisible? Was the A bomb not made by the white man? And were the first casualties of the A bomb Caucasian?

Roosevelt was instrumental to having the French and British reconsider their imperialistic path. The general Idea was to create a fragmented world of smaller independent countries under the league of Nations in order to forestall invasions and land grabbing by any of the bigger powers. Consider that since the end of WW2 you can actually count how many wars were fought by 2 Nations and usually if you arrive at any you will find that America fought in at least 30% of those. Most conflicts since then have been internal wars or civil strifes. The aggressive 3rd Reich types are nowhere to be found.
Roosevelt may not have lived to see the granting of independence by the British and French but his legacy did occur well after his death.

Finally, Japs are not Caucasians but Asians and since America detonated the A-Bomb they have been invincible.

Katsumoto:


4. Fighting on two fronts, declaring war is what ultimately cost the war for Germany. Without an Eastern Front, the US would have needed more troops in Europe. And without US/Canada financial support and fighting on the Western Front, the Russians would not have been able to fight back. Of the approximated 30 million who lost their lives on the Eastern Front, approximately 25- 27 million were Russians.

Summary – without US military and financial support, Europe (including Russia) had no chance against Germany.

.....the US as usual came to the party very late and reluctantly...the tide was already turning on the eastern front before FDR agreed to open a second western front...by then majority of the german war machine had been bogged down in the ussr(virtually 90% of the wermacht was used in operation barbarossa)...my point is if the plan to include stalin in the axis had succeeded or ussr was left in a neutral position... the battle of britain would have been another feather in the cap of hitler and america would have been left alone to face the might of the axis...

hitler goofed big time...this is general knowledge amongst war historians....he had the war machine but he fell victim to the hubris of having defeated poland and france so quickly...he thought russia would go down the same way...he should have consulted Napoleon..